You have failed to raise a valid point. Presently, the world generates more than enough grain to sustain nourishment all of humanity.
Starvation is now a wholly man-made and man-sustained epidemic.
"The world produces enough food to feed everyone. World agriculture produces 17 percent more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, despite a 70 percent population increase. This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day (FAO 2002, p.9). The principal problem is that many people in the world do not have sufficient land to grow, or income to purchase, enough food." [http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm]
how about we learn how to take care of today's problems first? educating and caring for the humanity which exists as opposed to the humanity which might not ever come to be makes a hell of a lot more sense than throwing money at the sun out of a paranoid perception that the very problems which we're ignoring (starving people, incurable disease, destroying the evironment... you know; the little things) will lead to circumstances which would, then, justify your line of thinking.
until we figure out how to feed starving people here on "this rock" we've got no business in learning how to get them off of it... where they can starve on other "rocks."
Specifically, as this is a discussion involving Shatner... I would wager a guess that Shatner fans care. I know it's Monday and people tend to not like them very much, but there's no call for being salty about trivia. It's okay to move along. =)
"Or are you suggesting they throw away all their desktops, their hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of dollars in windows software, and pay a giant team of developers to rewrite all that from scratch just so....they can what? Say they are leet?"
This.
"you are incredibly naive about what these machines actually do or you are a total zealot who would be happy to torpedo a company..."
Neither. With such knowledge, one can appreciate how and where resources are wasted. It's less a question of "what these machines do" than it is a question of what these machines *cannot* do... and the list of "cannot do" is vastly greater in reference to MS powered servers than the list of "cannot *yet* do" is in reference to the capabilities of a *NIX system. One is controlled by artificial limitations, the other is limited by artificial controls.
H.264 works just fine in Windows Media player and VLC. That is wasn't "bundled" with XP is moot, as one existed before the other.
The fact that it is trivial to get the technology to function in XP is what makes the whole comment irrelevant. The fact that it is a 10 year old OS which is capable of utilizing this newer tech really serves to strengthen my argument... The old tool is still suitable for the task.
Doesn't that depend on what you are utilizing the environment for? . Would it be foolish to attempt to run more modern games on such an antiquated device? Of course. However; One does not need multi-core processing and 10's of GB of ram to run CUPS on a home network.
If you were capable of completing a task in 1998 and that task hasn't changed; then I stand by my point that the age of the OS is irrelevant. Furthermore, so long as you are competent with securing your environment; the age of the whole damned environment is irrelevant.
It varies. I have a slackware install running a kernel build from 1997 on aged hardware as a print server, Solaris from 1999 running mail on a Sparc Classic, Redhat 6 on aged hardware as a file server, SCO Openserver on an abandoned IBM server for backups... Old games which run on a static win98 partition. None of these installations will ever see a software or kernel upgrade.
18 years ago; no. But... 14? yes.
Newer OS's remain optional and entirely disposable... and are nearly interchangeable.
"which is usually substantially more than they have at home."
I realize that this is not the case for everyone, but my home cable connection is at least one degree of magnitude greater than the bandwidth available at my place of employ. The reason someone torrents from work is because they can do it while hiding behind someone else's liability.
I'm running a print server on a P90. Slackware 3.0, unpatched, since 1997. Works like a champ. I'm running a mail server on a Sparc Classic. Solaris 5.5 (5.5.1?), patched regularly until 1999. Also; works like a champ. I'm running my file server/disk array on another P90. Redhat 6... never patched, never upgraded. It needs an update, but, also; works like a champ. My backup system runs on SCO Openserver, unpatched since 2002. No data loss to date. For legacy games, I have a Win98 partition available on a PIII laptop... Also, doing just fine. For more 'modern'' consumer based crap... the OS is disposable. Functionality is relevant; version is not.
If you think I'm irrelevant, that's cool... The few grand which I haven't spent in upgrades hasn't slowed me down one bit! The few grand which you've spent on upgrades has... cost you a few grand.
I'm still asking for a relevant point here... unless the point is to spend money on things which you don't need, I am failing to see one.
That it's 'in the open' just means that there is an urgency to correct these problems... problem being; that urgency existed prior to public disclosure.
Better to have this information publicly disclosed and subject to scrutiny than the previous system... which involved, apparently, obfuscating or ignoring vulnerabilities or gross incompetence of those responsible for detecting such vulnerabilities.
Linux is an 18 year old OS... Just because a corporation wants you to move on doesn't mean that you have to... The age of an OS is irrelevant. The age of a tool doesn't render it useless... It is the availability of a better tool which renders it less useful, but no matter what advances occur, a hammer will always be a hammer.
the republicans have little to no respect for the 'religious view of others' it is their own views which they seek to make an integral part of your life.
"With the proper documentation any valid method of serving the papers should be legally indisputable."
"Should be." But might not be. And... thanks for noting that we're talking about civil litigation and, particularly, your ability to DEFEND yourself.
With certified mail, you are removing a weapon from the arsenal of the attorney who is working to harm you... they cannot dispute the validity of USPS Certified mail. With ANY other option, you are potentially exposing yourself to unnecessary risks which can, and will, be used to leverage your property and assets.
With certified mail receipts, that the transaction occurred cannot be questioned.
Slashdot Mirror
You have failed to raise a valid point.
Presently, the world generates more than enough grain to sustain nourishment all of humanity.
Starvation is now a wholly man-made and man-sustained epidemic.
"The world produces enough food to feed everyone. World agriculture produces 17 percent more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, despite a 70 percent population increase. This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day (FAO 2002, p.9). The principal problem is that many people in the world do not have sufficient land to grow, or income to purchase, enough food."
[http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm]
So, are you arguing that permitting people to starve to death is acceptable? Disgusting sociopathy right there, mate.
We don't need science to feed people.
We need money. The resources already exist.
When the short term benefit is, literally, life versus death... opting for anything but immediate relief for the dying is pure evil.
Yeah... like food and medicine. Stupid conspiracy theorists all starving themselves and dying of curable diseases... the destitute are so selfish!
"eventually"
how about we learn how to take care of today's problems first? educating and caring for the humanity which exists as opposed to the humanity which might not ever come to be makes a hell of a lot more sense than throwing money at the sun out of a paranoid perception that the very problems which we're ignoring (starving people, incurable disease, destroying the evironment... you know; the little things) will lead to circumstances which would, then, justify your line of thinking.
until we figure out how to feed starving people here on "this rock" we've got no business in learning how to get them off of it... where they can starve on other "rocks."
Specifically, as this is a discussion involving Shatner... I would wager a guess that Shatner fans care.
I know it's Monday and people tend to not like them very much, but there's no call for being salty about trivia.
It's okay to move along. =)
"Or are you suggesting they throw away all their desktops, their hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of dollars in windows software, and pay a giant team of developers to rewrite all that from scratch just so....they can what? Say they are leet?"
This.
"you are incredibly naive about what these machines actually do or you are a total zealot who would be happy to torpedo a company..."
Neither. With such knowledge, one can appreciate how and where resources are wasted. It's less a question of "what these machines do" than it is a question of what these machines *cannot* do... and the list of "cannot do" is vastly greater in reference to MS powered servers than the list of "cannot *yet* do" is in reference to the capabilities of a *NIX system. One is controlled by artificial limitations, the other is limited by artificial controls.
Just a minor point of order here:
The Six Million Dollar Man and Kung Fu both occurred after the original Star Trek series had concluded.
They make up for it with unlimited free duplicate articles!
Phaser control is for communists.
H.264 works just fine in Windows Media player and VLC.
That is wasn't "bundled" with XP is moot, as one existed before the other.
The fact that it is trivial to get the technology to function in XP is what makes the whole comment irrelevant.
The fact that it is a 10 year old OS which is capable of utilizing this newer tech really serves to strengthen my argument... The old tool is still suitable for the task.
Relevant point suggestion made... again.
Hah! Fair enough... I should have specified "Federal" contractor.
"If a private company gropes you, public opinion forces them to change or they go out of business from driving away airport travelers"
Nonsense. Name one government contractor that has been forced out of business due to abuse.
Doesn't that depend on what you are utilizing the environment for?
.
Would it be foolish to attempt to run more modern games on such an antiquated device? Of course.
However; One does not need multi-core processing and 10's of GB of ram to run CUPS on a home network.
If you were capable of completing a task in 1998 and that task hasn't changed; then I stand by my point that the age of the OS is irrelevant. Furthermore, so long as you are competent with securing your environment; the age of the whole damned environment is irrelevant.
Reading comprehension cannot be taught.
What makes you think that these are internet connected devices?
What sort of idiot runs a print server as a desktop?
It varies. I have a slackware install running a kernel build from 1997 on aged hardware as a print server, Solaris from 1999 running mail on a Sparc Classic, Redhat 6 on aged hardware as a file server, SCO Openserver on an abandoned IBM server for backups... Old games which run on a static win98 partition. None of these installations will ever see a software or kernel upgrade.
18 years ago; no. But... 14? yes.
Newer OS's remain optional and entirely disposable... and are nearly interchangeable.
"which is usually substantially more than they have at home."
I realize that this is not the case for everyone, but my home cable connection is at least one degree of magnitude greater than the bandwidth available at my place of employ. The reason someone torrents from work is because they can do it while hiding behind someone else's liability.
I'm running a print server on a P90. Slackware 3.0, unpatched, since 1997. Works like a champ.
I'm running a mail server on a Sparc Classic. Solaris 5.5 (5.5.1?), patched regularly until 1999. Also; works like a champ.
I'm running my file server/disk array on another P90. Redhat 6... never patched, never upgraded. It needs an update, but, also; works like a champ.
My backup system runs on SCO Openserver, unpatched since 2002. No data loss to date.
For legacy games, I have a Win98 partition available on a PIII laptop... Also, doing just fine.
For more 'modern'' consumer based crap... the OS is disposable. Functionality is relevant; version is not.
If you think I'm irrelevant, that's cool... The few grand which I haven't spent in upgrades hasn't slowed me down one bit! The few grand which you've spent on upgrades has... cost you a few grand.
I'm still asking for a relevant point here... unless the point is to spend money on things which you don't need, I am failing to see one.
That it's 'in the open' just means that there is an urgency to correct these problems... problem being; that urgency existed prior to public disclosure.
Better to have this information publicly disclosed and subject to scrutiny than the previous system... which involved, apparently, obfuscating or ignoring vulnerabilities or gross incompetence of those responsible for detecting such vulnerabilities.
"Windows XP is 10 years old OS."
Spoken like a Windows customer.
Linux is an 18 year old OS... Just because a corporation wants you to move on doesn't mean that you have to... The age of an OS is irrelevant. The age of a tool doesn't render it useless... It is the availability of a better tool which renders it less useful, but no matter what advances occur, a hammer will always be a hammer.
Please make a relevant point.
the republicans have little to no respect for the 'religious view of others'
it is their own views which they seek to make an integral part of your life.
you seem like a pretty tough guy.
rawr to you and way to go with the threatening language!
"This isn't a game. This isn't a movie. But you fail to recognize that."
ooh... and hollow point bullets! just like the big boys?!!
stfu.
"With the proper documentation any valid method of serving the papers should be legally indisputable."
"Should be." But might not be. And... thanks for noting that we're talking about civil litigation and, particularly, your ability to DEFEND yourself.
With certified mail, you are removing a weapon from the arsenal of the attorney who is working to harm you... they cannot dispute the validity of USPS Certified mail. With ANY other option, you are potentially exposing yourself to unnecessary risks which can, and will, be used to leverage your property and assets.
With certified mail receipts, that the transaction occurred cannot be questioned.
This is tiresome...